DR. NARENDRA M. REGE, MUMBAI V. ITO 11(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3877/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9083 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Next Hearing Date: 11-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 22-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALOK JOHARI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL J BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHR I RAMIT KOCHAR , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO .3877 /MUM. / 2015 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 11 ) DR. NARENDRA M. REGE 403/404, RICHMOND CHSL LOKHANDWALA COMPLEX ANDHERI (W), MUMBAI 400 053 PAN AACPR2710C . APPELLANT V/S INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 11(3)(1), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ASSESSE E BY : SHRI BHARAT MANDOT A/W DR. NARENDRA M. REGE REVENUE BY : SHRI ALOK JOHARI DATE OF HEARING 26.10.2017 DATE OF ORDER 03.11.2017 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. AFORESAID APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 31 ST MARCH 201 5 , PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) 7 , MUMBAI, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 0 11 . 2 . BRIEF FACTS ARE, THE ASSESSEE AN INDIVIDUAL IS A DOCTOR BY PROFESSION. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER DISPUTE, THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 15 TH OCTOBER 2010, DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF ` 2 DR. NARENDRA M. REGE 4,61,680. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFF ICER ISSUED NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142(1) AND 143(2) OF THE ACT CALLING FOR VARIOUS DETAILS. H OWEVER, AS ALLEGED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER NEITHER THE ASSESSEE RESPONDED TO THE STATUTORY NOTICES NOR APPEARED BEFORE HIM. HOWEVER, SUBSEQUENTLY, THE AUTHORISED R EPRESENTATIVE APPEARED AND FURNISHED THE DETAILS CALLED FOR. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER VERIFYING THE DETAILS COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 31 ST MARCH 2013, MAKING A NUMBER OF ADDITIONS AS A RESULT OF WHICH THE TOTAL INCOME W AS DETERMINED AT ` 2,40,43,150. AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SO PASSED ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 3 . AS ALLEGED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), IN SPITE OF OPPORTUNITY BEING GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR AND REP RESENT HIS CASE NO ONE APPEARED. H ENCE, HE PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE OFF ASSESSEES APPEAL EX PARTE ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL ON RECORD AND ULTIMATELY HE DID NOT FIND MERIT IN ANY OF THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE R ESULTANTLY , ASSESSEES APPEAL WAS DISMISSED . 4 . WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE WHO WAS HIMSELF PRESENT IN THE COURT SUBMITTED THAT THE CONCERNED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WHO WAS AUTHORIZED BY THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT HIM BEFORE THE LEARNED COMM ISSIONER (APPEALS) NEITHER APPEARED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE 3 DR. NARENDRA M. REGE AUTHORITY NOR INTIMATED THE ASSESSEE THE PROGRESS OF THE PROCEEDING BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN DISMISSAL OF ASSESSEES APPEAL EX PARTE. HE SUBMITTED, ASSESSEE WAS COMPLETELY KEPT IN DARK BY THE CONCERNED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT REGARDING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). HE SUBMITTED, ON A COMPLAINT MADE BY HIM IN THIS REGARD AGAINST THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT , THE INSTITUTE OF CHAR TERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA HAS INITIATED DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. HE SUBMITTED, SINCE THE EX PARTE DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL WAS NOT DUE TO ASSESSEES FAULT, AN OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO PROPERLY EXPLAIN THE ISSUES RELATING TO THE ADDITIONS BEFORE THE DEPARTMENTAL AUTHORITIES. HE, THEREFORE, REQUESTED FOR RESTORING THE ISSUE S FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5 . LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUES ARE RESTOR ED BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DENOVO ADJUDICATION. 6 . ON A PERUSAL OF MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US BY THE ASSESSEE WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED FROM HAVING HIS SAY BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) IN RESPECT OF T HE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS HE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED DUE TO CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND HIS CONTROL. THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS OF THIS CASE, WE ARE INCLINED TO RESTORE ALL THE ISSUES 4 DR. NARENDRA M. REGE RAISED BEFORE US TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DENOVO ADJUDICATION AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO COMPLY TO THE STATUTORY NOTICES TO BE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CO OPERATE IN FINALIZATION OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. WIT H THE AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7 . IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03.11.2017 SD/ - RAMIT KOCHAR ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - SAKTIJIT DEY JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 03.11.2017 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : ( 1 ) THE ASSESSEE; ( 2 ) THE REVENUE; ( 3 ) THE CIT(A); ( 4 ) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; ( 5 ) THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; ( 6 ) GUARD FILE . TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI